Jump to content

How Fox News works


retread

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

Ā 

Itā€™s sort of like how they judge the severity of a hurricane based on how many Waffle Houses are still open. You can judge how much new trouble Trump is facing based on how often Fox News brings up Hunter Biden.Ā 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/13/business/media/fox-dominion-lawsuit-first-amendment.html

Ā 

Quote

In the weeks after President Donald J. Trump lost the 2020 election, the Fox Business host Lou Dobbs claimed to have ā€œtremendous evidenceā€ that voter fraud was to blame. That evidence never emerged but a new culprit in a supposed scheme to rig the election did: Dominion Voting Systems, a maker of election technology whose algorithms, Mr. Dobbs said, ā€œwere designed to be inaccurate.ā€

Ā 

Quote

Maria Bartiromo, another host on the network, falsely stated that ā€œNancy Pelosi has an interest in this company.ā€ Jeanine Pirro, a Fox News personality, speculated that ā€œtechnical glitchesā€ in Dominionā€™s software ā€œcould have affected thousands of absentee mail-in ballots.ā€

Ā 

Ā 

Quote

Those unfounded accusations are now among the dozens cited in Dominionā€™s defamationĀ lawsuitĀ against the Fox Corporation, which alleges that Fox repeatedly aired false, far-fetched and exaggerated allegations about Dominion and its purported role in a plot to steal votes from Mr. Trump.

Ā 

Quote

Those bogus assertions ā€” made day after day, including allegations that Dominion was a front for the communist government in Venezuela and that its voting machines could switch votes from one candidate to another ā€” are at the center of the libel suit, one of the most extraordinary brought against an American media company in more than a generation.

Ā 

Spoiler

First Amendment scholars say the case is a rarity in libel law. Defamation claims typically involve a single disputed statement. But Dominionā€™s complaint is replete with example after example of false statements, many of them made after the facts were widely known. And such suits are often quickly dismissed, because of the First Amendmentā€™s broad free speech protections and the high-powered lawyers available to a major media company like Fox. If they do go forward, they are usually settled out of court to spare both sides the costly spectacle of a trial.

But Dominionā€™s $1.6 billion case against Fox has been steadily progressing in Delaware state court this summer, inching ever closer to trial. There have been no moves from either side toward a settlement, according to interviews with several people involved in the case. The two companies are deep into document discovery, combing through years of each otherā€™s emails and text messages, and taking depositions.

These people said they expected Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, who own and control the Fox Corporation, to sit for depositions as soon as this month.

The case threatens a huge financial and reputational blow to Fox, by far the most powerful conservative media company in the country. But legal scholars say it also has the potential to deliver a powerful verdict on the kind of pervasive and pernicious falsehoods ā€” and the people who spread them ā€” that are undermining the countryā€™s faith in democracy.Ā 

ā€œWeā€™re litigating history in a way: What is historical truth?ā€ said Lee Levine, a noted First Amendment lawyer who has argued several major media defamation cases. ā€œHere youā€™re taking very recent current events and going through a process which, at the end, is potentially going to declare what the correct version of history is.ā€

The case has caused palpable unease at the Fox News Channel, said several people there, who would speak only anonymously. Anchors and executives have been preparing for depositions and have been forced to hand over months of private emails and text messages to Dominion, which is hoping to prove that network employees knew that wild accusations of ballot rigging in the 2020 election were false. The hosts Steve Doocy, Dana Perino and Shepard Smith are among the current and former Fox personalities who either have been deposed or will be this month.

Dominion is trying to build a case that aims straight at the top of the Fox media empire and the Murdochs. In court filings and depositions, Dominion lawyers have laid out how they plan to show that senior Fox executives hatched a plan after the election to lure back viewers who had switched to rival hard-right networks, which were initially more sympathetic than Fox was to Mr. Trumpā€™s voter-fraud claims.

Libel law doesnā€™t protect lies. But it does leave room for the media to cover newsworthy figures who tell them. And Fox is arguing, in part, thatā€™s what shields it from liability. Asked about Dominionā€™s strategy to place the Murdochs front and center in the case, a Fox Corporation spokesman said it would be a ā€œfruitless fishing expedition.ā€ A spokeswoman for Fox News said it was ā€œridiculousā€ to claim, as Dominion does in the suit, that the network was chasing viewers from the far-right fringe.

Fox is expected to dispute Dominionā€™s estimated self-valuation of $1 billion and argue that $1.6 billion is an excessively high amount for damages, as it has in a similar defamation case filed by another voting machine company, Smartmatic.

A spokesman for Dominion declined to comment. In itsĀ initial complaint, the companyā€™s lawyers wrote that ā€œThe truth matters,ā€ adding, ā€œLies have consequences.ā€

For Dominion to convince a jury that Fox should be held liable for defamation and pay damages, it has to clear an extremely high legal bar known as the ā€œactual maliceā€ standard. Dominion must show either that people inside Fox knew what hosts and guests were saying about the election technology company was false, or that they effectively ignored information proving that the statements in question were wrong ā€” which is known in legal terms as displaying a reckless disregard for the truth.

A judge recently ruled that Dominion had met that actual malice standard ā€œat this stage,ā€ allowing it to expand the scope of its case against Fox and the kind of evidence it can seek from the companyā€™s senior executives.

In late June, Judge Eric M. Davis of Delaware Superior CourtĀ denied a motionĀ from Fox that would have excluded the parent Fox Corporation from the case ā€” a much larger target than Fox News itself. That business encompasses the most profitable parts of the Murdoch American media portfolio and is run directly by Rupert Murdoch, 91, who serves as chairman, and his elder son, Lachlan, the chief executive.

Soon after, Fox replaced its outside legal team on the case and hired one of the countryā€™s most prominent trial lawyers ā€” a sign that executives believe that the chances the case is headed to trial have increased.

Dominionā€™s lawyers have focused some of their questioning in depositions on the decision-making hierarchy at Fox News, according to one person with direct knowledge of the case, showing a particular interest in what happened on election night inside the network in the hours after it projected Mr. Trump would lose Arizona. That call short-circuited the presidentā€™s plan to prematurely declare victory, enraging him and his loyalists and precipitating a temporary ratings crash for Fox.

These questions have had a singular focus, this person said: to place Lachlan Murdoch in the room when the decisions about election coverage were being made. This person added that while testimony so far suggests the younger Murdoch did not try to pressure anyone at Fox News to reverse the call ā€” as Mr. Trump and his campaign aides demanded the network do ā€” he did ask detailed questions about the process that Foxā€™s election analysts had used after the call became so contentious.

Foxā€™s legal team has cited the broad protections the First Amendment allows, arguing that statements about Dominion machines from its anchors like Mr. Dobbs and Ms. Bartiromo, and guests like Rudolph W. Giuliani and Sidney Powell, were protected opinion and the kind of speech that any media organization would cover as indisputably newsworthy.

ā€œWhen the president and his lawyers are making allegations, that in and of itself is newsworthy,ā€ Dan Webb, the trial lawyer brought in by Fox several weeks ago, said in an interview. ā€œTo say that shouldnā€™t be reported on, I donā€™t think a jury would buy that. And thatā€™s what I think the plaintiffs are saying here.ā€

Mr. Webbā€™s most recent experience in a major media defamation case was representing the other side: a South Dakota meat manufacturer in a lawsuit against ABC for a report about the safety of low-cost processed beef trimmings, often called ā€œpink slime.ā€Ā The case was settled in 2017.

But Fox has also been searching for evidence that could, in effect, prove the Dominion conspiracy theories werenā€™t really conspiracy theories. Behind the scenes, Foxā€™s lawyers have pursued documents that would support numerous unfounded claims about Dominion, including its supposed connections to Hugo ChĆ”vez, the Venezuelan dictator who died in 2013, and software features that were ostensibly designed to make vote manipulation easier.

According to court filings, the words and phrases that Fox has asked Dominion to search for in internal communications going back more than a decade include ā€œChavezā€ and ā€œHugo,ā€ along with ā€œtampered,ā€ ā€œbackdoor,ā€ ā€œstolenā€ and ā€œTrump.ā€

Fox News and Fox Business gave a platform to some of the loudest purveyors of these theories, including Mike Lindell, the MyPillow founder, and Mr. Giuliani, the presidentā€™s personal lawyer, in the days and weeks after major news outlets including Fox declared Joseph R. Biden Jr. the president-elect. In one interview, Mr. Giuliani falsely claimed that Dominion was owned by a Venezuelan company with close ties to Mr. Chavez, and that it was formed ā€œto fix elections.ā€ (Dominion was founded in Canada in 2002 by a man who wanted to make it easier for blind people to vote.)

Mr. Dobbs, who conducted one of the interviews cited in Dominionā€™s complaint, responded encouragingly to Mr. Giuliani, saying he believed he was witnessing ā€œthe endgame to a four-and-a-half-year-long effort to overthrow the president of the United States.ā€ Fox canceled Mr. Dobbsā€™s Fox Business show last year, though it has never issued a retraction for any of the commentary about Dominion.

Dominion has also filed separate lawsuits against Mr. Giuliani, Ms. Powell and Mr. Lindell.

Dominion says in its complaint that in the weeks after the election, people started leaving violent voice mail messages at its offices, threatening to execute everyone who worked there and blow up the headquarters. At one office, someone hurled a brick through a window. The company had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on security and lost hundreds of millions more in business, according to its complaint.

ā€œThe harm to Dominion from the lies told by Fox is unprecedented and irreparable because of how fervently millions of people believed them ā€” and continue to believe them,ā€ its complaint said.

The company has tried to draw a connection between those falsehoods and the Jan. 6 siege at the Capitol. ā€œThese lies did not simply harm Dominion,ā€ the company said in the complaint. ā€œThey harmed democracy. They harmed the idea of credible elections.ā€

As part of its case, it cites one of the most indelible images from the Jan. 6 attack: a man in the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, clutching zip ties in his left hand. Also in the suit is a second photo of the man, later identified asĀ Eric MunchelĀ of Tennessee, in which he is brandishing a shotgun, with Mr. Trump on a television in the background. The television is tuned to Fox Business.

But the hurdle Dominion must clear is whether it can persuade a jury to believe that people at Fox knew they were spreading lies.

ā€œDisseminating ā€˜The Big Lieā€™ isnā€™t enough,ā€ said RonNell Andersen Jones, a law professor and First Amendment scholar at the University of Utahā€™s S.J. Quinney College of Law. ā€œIt has to be a knowing lie.ā€

Ā 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

FaFXEknUIAExEFd?format=jpg&name=900x900

I caught a few minutes of his show tonight... which is about all I could endure without my head exploding. Ā 

His audience was told repeatedly that it has turned out that there were absolutely no classified documents there, and the government's case has been proven 100% false. Ā It was pure disinformation delivered with seething rage.

I'm not sure how long a democracy can survive this poison being injected on a daily basis by the "news" network with the widest viewership.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Capture+_2022-08-14-02-32-30-1.png

And I heard that Garland personally signed off on the order. Meanwhile, Joe Dementia doesn't even know where Ohio is anymore.

11 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

FaFXEknUIAExEFd?format=jpg&name=900x900

We did. That's why he's sitting at Mar-a-Lago instead of the Oval Office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always Russia,Ā  Russia,Ā  Russia with these folks

/s

https://www.foxnews.com/world/russia-uses-fbi-trump-raid-foment-discord-amplify-tensions-us

"The Russians understand that Donald Trump is a hot button in America and they use their narratives to foment discord and amplify tensions in our country," Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer and the author ofā€Æ"Putinā€™s Playbook: Russiaā€™s Secret Plan toā€ÆDefeat America," told Fox News.

Ā 

The comments come after multiple Russian media outlets have expressed support for Trump in the days since the FBI raid on his home, with both Izvestia and RenTV arguing over the weekend that the raid was designed to prevent Trump from running for president in 2024.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

It's always Russia,Ā  Russia,Ā  Russia with these folks

/s

https://www.foxnews.com/world/russia-uses-fbi-trump-raid-foment-discord-amplify-tensions-us

"The Russians understand that Donald Trump is a hot button in America and they use their narratives to foment discord and amplify tensions in our country," Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer and the author ofā€Æ"Putinā€™s Playbook: Russiaā€™s Secret Plan toā€ÆDefeat America," told Fox News.

Ā 

The comments come after multiple Russian media outlets have expressed support for Trump in the days since the FBI raid on his home, with both Izvestia and RenTV arguing over the weekend that the raid was designed to prevent Trump from running for president in 2024.

Well that's not gonna go over well with the rubes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I still canā€™t connect in my brain: how could any graduate of the university of texas who supports Trump look around him, realize that the people agreeing with him are the worst of aggy and Russian state media, and not immediately realize HOLY FUCK I MUST BE WRONG.
I donā€™t get it. If I ever take ANY position on an issue of substance, and find myself accompanied by a cheering throng of aggy and Russian news outletsā€¦.Iā€™m immediately questioning my position.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is what I still canā€™t connect in my brain: how could any graduate of the university of texas who supports Trump look around him, realize that the people agreeing with him are the worst of aggy and Russian state media, and not immediately realize HOLY FUCK I MUST BE WRONG.
I donā€™t get it. If I ever take ANY position on an issue of substance, and find myself accompanied by a cheering throng of aggy and Russian news outletsā€¦.Iā€™m immediately questioning my position.

Not even just that. Just the weird logic pretzel you have to twist yourself into.

The easy question of "Should any person have top secret documents being held in their pool house?" turns into an answer ofĀ "Defund the FBI!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

This is what I still canā€™t connect in my brain: how could any graduate of the university of texas who supports Trump look around him, realize that the people agreeing with him are the worst of aggy and Russian state media, and not immediately realize HOLY FUCK I MUST BE WRONG.
I donā€™t get it. If I ever take ANY position on an issue of substance, and find myself accompanied by a cheering throng of aggy and Russian news outletsā€¦.Iā€™m immediately questioning my position.

They were very conflicted when we hired an Armenian for our footballĀ coach. Ā 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see where they go with that argument. "You see, shortly before Biden was inaugurated, Trump declassified a shitpot of nuclear/military/whatever secrets and boxed everything up and took it all home and refused to return it and then lied about returning it. And no you may not ask me why."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, even conceding Nixonā€™s argument is true for a second, what we are actually talking about is something Trump did after he was no longer president, so their point is moot anyway. Because it was the act of non-president trump taking shit with him when he left his job that his former employer wanted back that is at issue here, not what then President Trump might have looked at inside the White House while he was president.Ā 
Ā 

i wish theyā€™d at least try to make cogent arguments.Ā 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

The guy reciting the Nixon argument is a graduate of UT Law.

What I have discovered over the last few years is that for those of us with STEM graduate degrees this is what Law School would look like.

test guy GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

This sounds like the legal equivalent of being tagged and saying "I had invincibility powers the whole time so I can't be tagged"

Itā€™s like accidentally killing a neighborhood bully in late November of 1988 with lawn darts, and nobody can do shit to you because you were still a minor, the CPSC hadnā€™t technically banned them yet, and you made sure that the darts had no documentation, warnings, etc. still with them, and you arenā€™t sure where they came from, and the other three kids who were there all stuck to their stories that the bully was forcing everybody to play chicken with the darts.

Well, maybe not quite like that.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the President does something, itā€™s not illegal. Ā So, therefore, if President Biden arrested Donald Trump and fed him to sharks with laser beams attached to their heads in his secret volcano lair under the pedophile pizza parlor, then by law nobody can complain.
Get this man the Nobel Peace Prize!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

This sounds like the legal equivalent of being tagged and saying "I had invincibility powers the whole time so I can't be tagged"

"Calvinball as public policy" will be the title of my next Ted Talk.Ā 

  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Ɨ
Ɨ
  • Create New...